Via the Daily Caller, a teaser for his appearance on "Hannity" later tonight. If I didn't know better, I'd say that a guy who just visited Israel and is now talking about blocking executive overreach on gun-grabbing just might be running for president in 2016.

The bill will go nowhere but conservatives will appreciate the gesture:

Im told Sen. Rand Paul will introduce language within hours, within hours, to call for the nullification and prohibition of funding for the presidents executive actions announced today and possibly even using the federal courts to nullify and defund some of the things that he plans on doing, [Fox News host Eric] Bolling said.

[A] Capitol Hill source told TheDC that Pauls legislation is expected to do three things: nullify Obamas executive orders, defund them and ask the Senate to file a court challenge to them.

At the very least, if he can figure out a way to bring this to the floor, it’ll be fun to see how Democrats whose seats are up next year will vote on it. Word on the Hill is that Reid might not even force a vote on the assault-weapons ban lest it prove too difficult for red-state Dems’ reelection campaigns. (According to a CNN poll released today, the recent surge of support for gun control is already starting to fade.) Will Mark Begich? Mary Landrieu? Heidi Heitkamp? Watch the video of her below from a local newscast yesterday (via the Washington Free Beacon) not only sounding sour on Obama’s gun recommendations but going so far as to accuse the White House of having an agenda unrelated to school shootings. Which, of course, is true.

Exit question: How many doctors are really going to follow the White House’s recommendations to talk to their patients about gun safety? I know they do get intrusive on occasion, and it’s a legit topic in the case of a patient who seems genuinely mental, but doctors must realize what a hot button this subject is for many people. Why risk alienating a patient and having him take his business elsewhere by trying to have “the talk” with him about guns? How many doctors know enough about guns themselves to even have that talk? This seems like a golden example of the White House floating an idea that sounds conscientious — it isn’t, it’s just the AMA’s attempt to leach some extra federal money — but which will be roundly ignored. The nicest thing that can be said for it is that it’s not remotely the most laughworthy recommendation offered by Obama this morning.

Well, for me personally, my Constitutional right to keep and bear arms is a more pressing matter than the inconvenience of illegals running around washing dishes and blowing leaves for sub minimum wage pay. I won't lose sleep over the latter if he's focusing on the former.

8
posted on 01/17/2013 2:49:49 PM PST
by Sirius Lee
(All that is required for evil to advance is for government to do "something")

In fact, why are the public schools evidently not teaching that the Founding States made the Constitution's Sections 1-3 of Article I to clarify that all legislative powers of the federal government are vested in the elected members of Congress, Congress therefore having a monopoly on federal legislative powers whether it wants it or not. (But what are legislative powers the people ask in unison?)

Thanks AuntB! That’s a fantastic link to a summary of school threats or violence between 1988-2011 which links to more details. How can MSM ignore this clear correlation of school violence (using various methods including guns) and folks on some form of anti-depressant drugs. (I know the answer to that, it does not fit their narrative).

The 23 point Fatwa issued by Obama are called Executive Actions because there is not a single Executive Order among them. Most of it is all power and light and no action, Obama doesn’t want to be caught with his name attached to something that backfires. The Democrats in the Senate, especially the Red State Dems who are up for reelection, don’t want it stuck to their fingers either.

This stuff won’t be enacted into law. The danger is in the stuff that Obama can do administratively like what Lisa Jackson has done at EPA - that could be significant and it can be done in the dark of night.

Well, for me personally, my Constitutional right to keep and bear arms is a more pressing matter than the inconvenience of illegals running around washing dishes and blowing leaves for sub minimum wage pay.

Inconvenience??? Illegal aliens cost at least $113 billion a year. Since 9/11, over 50,000 Americans have lost their lives to illegal aliens who have committed millions of crimes including murder, rape, armed robbery, etc. They make up one third of the inmates in federal prisons.

I won't lose sleep over the latter if he's focusing on the former.

He should be focusing on both. Obama deserves to be impeached for his illegal, backdoor amnesty. Their is currently a lawsuit by border patrol agents accusing the President of not allowing them to enforce the laws of the United States, something they and the President swore under oath to do.

Spoke with his chief of staff. Paul wants to have a path to citizenship for illegal aliens. He has gone over to the dark side on illegal immigration.

"In an interview with POLITICO, Paul said hell return to Congress this week pushing measures long avoided by his party. He wants to work with liberal Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy and Republicans to eliminate mandatory minimum sentences for pot possession. He wants to carve a compromise immigration plan with an eventual path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, a proposal he believes could be palatable to conservatives. And he believes his ideas  along with pushing for less U.S. military intervention in conflicts overseas  could help the GOP broaden its tent and appeal to crucial voting blocs that handed Democrats big wins in the West Coast, the Northeast and along the Great Lakes.

I like Rand more than I liked his dad, but I appreciated his dad's generally Constitutional first point of view, which I think had a lot to do with why Ron Paul got so much support from college age voters.

To my thinking, Rand takes a more common sense approach to foreign policy than his dad did, but both make more sense than what we are doing now.

The comments Rand Paul recently made in Israel are more in line with what I'd like to see for our foreign policy and maybe a bit closer to what George Washington had in mind.

26
posted on 01/17/2013 4:28:51 PM PST
by GBA
(Here in the Matrix, life is but a dream.)

It outlines most of the mass killings/violent attacks and the LEGAL drugs each of the perps was on or withdrawing from at the time.

So not only are liberals "freeing" nutcases to roam the streets drugged with virtually worthless "happy pills" with and definitely destructive side effects, virtually every one of these cases occurred in a "gun-free zone"!

So we conservatives are all supposed to sit down and shut up while they implement their "solutions" (designed to get us killed because their pet criminals are not going to pay any heed to said "solutions," and employing hordes of Democrat bureaucrats to feed off the crimes) because those disasters were supposedly our fault, because we believe in people exercising their right to armed self-defense... except that the crimes occurred where people were NOT permitted to defend themselves.

So here we are, rubbing our hands and hoping that our "leaders" don't sell out too much. Yet even though liberals manufactured these "crises," not a one of our supposed "leaders" even attempts to hold them accountable for setting up the whole thing.

Have I got that about right?

30
posted on 01/17/2013 5:11:55 PM PST
by Carry_Okie
(GunWalker: Arming "a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as well funded")

Why should one be more pressing than the other? Right now, no one is having their guns taken away. There are 250 million guns in circulation. Obama will never be able to pass the assault weapons ban in Congress. Harry Reid doesn't even want to put it up for a vote in the Senate until it is passed in the House. And it will never get thru the House.

This is all a distraction from our real problems, including illegal immigration. It is easy to demonstrate a spine on the gun issue because it is a winner. The Reps are being stampeded on amnesty in the false hope that they will somehow get more of the Hispanic and immigrant vote. They will not and will end up legalizing more Dem voters.

I am a strong believer in the 2nd Amendment and an NRA member, but I am not as concerned about Obama's charade on gun control as I am about our dire fiscal condition and the lack of the Reps desire to confront the Dems on it. The latest example is the passage of the pork-laden Sandy bill of about $60 billion, which is approximates the same amount of revenue raised by the taxing the rich hike to avoid the fiscal cliff.

Obama is employing a Cloward-Piven strategy of manufacturing all of these crises to distract from what he is really doing to transform this country, e.g., the implementation of another huge entitlement program--Obamacare. He has the Reps running around trying to stamp out multiple small fires while he employs a grand strategy to destroy this country. Immigration, legal and illegal, has changed the demographics of this country, which will make the Dems the permanent majority party. Obama, a failed President, was reelected, which demonstrates we have reached a tipping point in this country politically.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.